|
|
|
 |
|
|
 RSS Feed
| › Most Recent Postings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original Post:
|
|
|
|
|
|
| O'Connor "love story" gets cold shoulder |
|
| Wed, November 14, 2007 |
|
Veronica Sanchez produced a scoop that evidently has made some major news organizations squeamish -- or they're simply blind to the sort of news that ordinary people care about. Sanchez is the reporter at KPNX-Channel 12 in Phoenix who produced this report last Thursday on Sandra Day O'Connor's husband John, an Alzheimer's patient in a Phoenix nursing home who has formed a relationship with another woman. Sanchez handled the report with sensitivity and intelligence, showing the O'Connors' son Scott on camera describing his dad's "high school romance" with a woman shown on camera and identified only as "Kay." The former justice did not speak to the station, and has declined comment since then, but Scott O'Connor portrays her as comfortable with her husband's infidelity -- because, obviously, of his mental condition. The video is worth watching. I braced myself for a "this-just-in" wallow in self-promotion, but instead saw a touching story told well.
Since then, the most prominent pickup of the story was Joan Biskupic's on the front page of yesterday's USA Today. Biskupic, Justice O'Connor's biographer, quotes from the KPNX report, as does the AP report that has been picked up in the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, and on The New York Times' Web site (though evidently not in print). Two Times blogs, the newsy Lede and a health blog, have picked up on the story, but without original reporting on the O'Connors' situation. The Tribune's Supreme Court reporter, Jim Oliphant, blogged about it, calling it a "rather stunning tale" but only quoting briefly from the USA Today story quoting from the Channel 12 report. Similar treatment from the Post's Andrew Cohen here. Not one Supreme Court reporter seems to have followed Biskupic's lead to acknowledge the TV report in print, much less done his or her own reporting on the story.
What's with such a tepid response? The big Supreme Court players aren't in the hunt for the story, and seem to have little stomach for even obligatory mentions. Is it because it's merely gossip? I don't understand how they could see it that way. As the tasteful original report and a follow-up in the Arizona Republic point out, Alzheimer's patients often form such bonds, which may or may not be met with understanding from spouses and other families. It's an interesting and touching issue, in other words, and the O'Connors' willingness to have the story told undoubtedly helps others understand the disease. It's also newsworthy in its own right, as Justice O'Connor stepped down to care for her husband, her law school sweetheart. Does that put his health in play? You bet it does. You have to hope that coverage would be subdued and respectful -- as it has been, even given the story's surprising twist.
So what else explains the general discomfort with the story? Fear of offending O'Connor? Why, when her own son made the story possible? Refusal to chase someone else's scoop? Maybe that's it -- though not for the usual reason (unwillingness to give credit to a competitor), but for reasons of taste (not wanting to harass the family asking questions that were adequately answered already). Perhaps that's understandable, but it's also a reminder that this is one beat where the reporters give their subjects wide berth -- maybe too much so.
|
|
Posted at 01:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are 0 comments to this post:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
